My hometown is West Orange, New Jersey. Previously we were known as the location of Thomas Edison's factory and for the first planned residential
community in the country, Llewllyn Park.

We now seem to have garnered some additional noteriety as one of our more vocal and politically active residents received a threatening cease and
desist letter for the town attorney. Jake Freivald, the reciepient of the letter, has been an outspoken critic of the the town's current and past
political leanings and is a member of the local Tea Party group. He started a domain name, westorange.info, to facilitate discourse about the town and
was promptly sent a cease and desist email from the town attorney, Richard Trenk.

Jake reached out to a friend (and fellow West Orange resident) who responded, pro bono, to the town and the response has made its way through the
blogosphere all the way to the Huff Post, Gawker and finally to the Associated Press (who ironically also know about government bullying).

The cease and desist and the humorous repsonse are below:

Dear Mr. Freivald:

I am the Township Attorney for the Township of West Orange (“Township”). It has come to our attention that, on or about May 13, 2013, you
registered and began to use the domain name “westorange.info” (the “Info Domain”). The Township interprets this action as an effort by you to
confuse and conflate the Township’s official domain name and Web site with the Info Domain that you maintain.

The use of the Township’s name is unauthorized and is likely to cause confustion [sic], mistake or to deceive the public and may be a violation of
the Township’s federally protected rights. The Info Domain falsely creates the impression that the Township is associated or affiliated with the
Info Domain. At a minimum, this action has been taken with constructive knowledge of the Township’s name and Web site, and constitutes bad faith use
of the Info Domain.

Accordingly, the Township demands that you cease and desist from use, ownership and maintenance of the Info Domain. The Township further demands that,
within ten (10) days, the Info Domain be withdrawn from the current registrar, and that you cease all current and future use of the Info Domain, or
anything else confusingly similar thereto.

I am pro bono counsel to Jake Freivald and write in response to your “cease and desist letter,” dated May 13, 2013, regarding his domain
westorange.info. Obviously it was sent in jest, and the world can certainly use more legal satire. Bravo, Mr. Trenk !

Not that we didn’t get the joke … but since Mr. Freivald had not previously encountered a humorous lawyer, he actually thought your letter may
have been a serious effort by the Township to protect its legitimate interests. Rest assured, I’ve at least convinced him that it was certainly not
some impulsive, ham-fisted attempt to bully a local resident solely because of his well-known political views. After all, as lawyers you and I both
know that would be flagrantly unconstitutional and would also, in the words of my 4-year old, make you a big meanie.

Nonetheless, to further allay my client’s concerns, will you kindly forward to me copies of the prank cease and desist letters you have no doubt
also sent to the owners of the following domains:

Oh, and just to play along, had you intended for your letter to be taken seriously, even in some small measure, we would have sent in response
something along the following lines:

* * *

Dear Mr. Trenk:

1) The suggestion that Mr. Freivald’s website is “likely to cause confusion” or “falsely create the impression” of association with the
Township is farcical. As is evident from the attached home page snapshots, the Township’s website is a “virtual” masterpiece developed by Icon
Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a CivicPlus, at a cost to West Orange taxpayers of $35,000 (plus $5,000 per annum for hosting and maintenance). By contrast, my
client’s rudimentary website (cost: $3.17,1 free hosting) is so minimalist that it arguably qualifies as modern art.

2) To date, all ICANN rulings in this area have held that geographic domain names, by themselves, are not protected marks – especially when claimed
by government or municipal authorities.2

3) I can’t believe I really have to explain this, but here goes … after nearly a century of First Amendment jurisprudence, it is well-settled that
content-based restrictions on free speech by the government3 are subject to “strict scrutiny”, and will only be upheld upon a showing that such
restrictions “promote a compelling [governmental] interest” and are the “least restrictive means to further the articulated interest”. See,
e.g., Sable Communications of California, Inc. v. Fed. Comm. Commission, 492 U.S. 115, 126 (1989), and about a kajillion other U.S. Supreme Court free
speech cases.

4) Will you kindly explain exactly which of its “federally protected rights” the Township believes my client “may” have violated.

5) So that I may properly counsel my client, please also explain what in Sam Hill’s name you meant by “anything else confusingly similar
thereto.”

6) Last but not least, will you kindly provide to me the specific legal basis or bases for the Township’s demand that my client cease and desist
from “use, ownership and maintenance” of his domain. To paraphrase the bar exam instructions, feel free to cite any authority you consider
relevant, including Federal, state or local laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, etc. (even those voluminous Township playground rules no one pays
attention to). Since New Jersey Rule of Professional Conduct 4.1(a)(1) prohibits a lawyer from making a “false statement of material fact or law to
a third person”, surely you must have persuasive authority for the Township’s extraordinary demand that my client relinquish private property
lawfully purchased and owned by him.

If you manage to produce supporting authority that even remotely passes the laugh test, I will donate $100 in your honor to the American Civil
Liberties Union – NJ Chapter. I plan to make the donation online, assuming the State of New Jersey has not shut down aclu-nj.org.

* * *

But of course, only a humorless suit would have sent such a response to your literary gag gift.

Sincerely yours,
Stephen B. Kaplitt

P.S. Off topic, but as long as we’re chatting, I hereby demand from the Township a refund in the amount of $28,763.22 for excess property taxes
levied on 74 Terrace Avenue since my acquisition of ownership on August 9, 2010. Detailed calculations and legal authority available on request.

P.P.S. Wait, I have a better idea. I just learned that westorange.gov is still available and any state or local agency can license it from the U.S.
General Services Administration for only $125 per year. Since the whole refund thing might trigger a stampede if word got around, instead how about if
I form a limited liability company to conceal my identity, and then use it to license westorange.gov from the GSA – I’ll just need a letter from
Mayor Parisi designating my LLC as an authorized Township agent – and then my LLC will sublicense it to the Township for a paid-up royalty of
$28,763.22 ! Pretty clever, huh ? Krakoviak will be a hard sell, but Sayers should like it. Just something to consider …

—–

[1] Jake swears that was his actual cost. Looking at his website, I believe him.

[2] See, e.g., City of Dearborn v. Dan Mekled d/b/a ID Solutions, FA 99602 (Nat. Arb. Forum Nov. 12, 2001)(insufficient evidence that “City of
Dearborn” is a protected common law mark); City of Myrtle Beach v. Information Centers, Inc. FA 0112000103367(Nat. Arb. Forum March 8, 2002)(“The
City of Myrtle Beach is a geographical place. There is insufficient evidence that the name has acquired any secondary meaning [to create a protected
trademark interest]”); and City of Salinas v. Brian Baughn, FA 97076 (Nat. Arb. Forum June 4, 2001)(insufficient evidence that “City of Salinas”
mark acquired secondary meaning such that the City of Salinas may claim the exclusive right to use as a trademark).

[3] Yes, that includes the Township of West Orange. See Herbert v. Lando, 441 U.S. 153, 168 n. 16 (1979).

This shows that the lack of transparency in our government and their desire to bully the common citizen is not just relagated to the federal
government but exists at all levels and we must all be vigilant and respond to it at every opportunity.

edit on 23-6-2013 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer

Love the response given by the pro bono lawyer who decided to help this gentleman out with a real pain in the butt. Thanks for the chuckle...

I do agree with the responding attorney, as if they really wanted to protect those names, they would've bought them up and made sure no one else
could purchase the names involved. I hope the offending attorney gets his hands slapped for being so stupid as to attempt to bully a citizen who was
doing nothing wrong. Guys like that give lawyers a bad name.

Originally posted by SweetKarma
Love the response given by the pro bono lawyer who decided to help this gentleman out with a real pain in the butt. Thanks for the
chuckle...

No worries.

I do agree with the responding attorney, as if they really wanted to protect those names, they would've bought them up and made sure no one
else could purchase the names involved. I hope the offending attorney gets his hands slapped for being so stupid as to attempt to bully a citizen who
was doing nothing wrong. Guys like that give lawyers a bad name.

As of this point Trenk has yet to respond to any inquiry or questioning, either by Jake's attorney or by the Associated Press. I live near a few of
our Town Council members and I know this is shaping up to be a major issue at the next council meeting. Residents are already calling for him to
resign and determine who authorized the sending of this letter and whether other letters were sent to the domain owners with sites using
'westorange' in their names as was pointed out by Jake's attorney or if this was a targeted attack.

the Township’s website is a “virtual” masterpiece developed by Icon Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a CivicPlus, at a cost to West Orange taxpayers of
$35,000 (plus $5,000 per annum for hosting and maintenance)

Holy crap. When did the NJ mob get into website construction. Guess it is covered by the fact that government spends taxpayer monies, not monies they
earn.

Edit:
At the next meeting, Someone should point out that website costs are beyond outrageous. The answer should be a hoot.

I am a firm believer that the ordinary citizen should be able to access the court system without an expensive lawyer - I really think this is the
wave of the near future.

You can get a divorce for less than 200 hundred dollars and do your own paperwork - you should be able to fight the federal gov't -whom we have to
fund - with much less.

With this NSA disclosure of survellance (sp?) on everyone - that we as taxpayers are paying for - should be free to use as the taxpayer deems
necessary (no privacy laws when the citizen has no expectancy of privacy for their info?).

And, of course, in this case, the extravagant amount of taxpayer money used (allocatted - I'm having a problem with spelling it seems -from the tax
payer dime) to set up township web pages?

In the sake of fairness it was $35,000 to design and $5,000 per year to maintain.

I charge clients the cost of hosting the website plus the yearly renewal of the website, which comes to the whopping cost of MAYBE 150.00 A YEAR, plus
a little extra for my time and labor, usually between $50 & $100, depending on the type of website and how often I have to update it...
No wonder I'm broke....

It used to be that everyone was getting scammed but as the public smartens up the last bastion of scammers is municipalities and ignorant small
business owners.

Web design thrives on consumer ignorance. In the case of municipalities its ignorance paired with a blank check.

If more people would do a little research theyd see too many web design firms/individuals are as crooked as car salesmen if not moreso.

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

You hit the nail right on the head. Web designers of today are like car mechanics of the past and present. Some people get so intimidated when it
comes to building a web page, they will pay whatever a designer will charge them.
Most times, their hosting services have templates to build on, a couple of clicks, some text entry and you have a professional looking website in a
couple of hours. I feel I am an HONEST web designer, and would never charge a client a buttload of cash for a website. Like I said earlier, this is
why I'm probably broke LOL

In the sake of fairness it was $35,000 to design and $5,000 per year to maintain.

I charge clients the cost of hosting the website plus the yearly renewal of the website, which comes to the whopping cost of MAYBE 150.00 A YEAR, plus
a little extra for my time and labor, usually between $50 & $100, depending on the type of website and how often I have to update it...
No wonder I'm broke....

seems like you don't actually design them, i design websites and if i were designing one for a huge client like that i would expect a more
substantial pay than i would get from a smaller client. 30k on a single project is crazy though, that designer was a lucky guy.as for the article
kudos to the responding lawyer for that reply, highly enjoyed it.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.